MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-CHINA-TAIWAN RELATIONS

UNCLAS AIT TAIPEI 000130 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/TC, EAP/P, EAP/PD - THOMAS HAMM DEPARTMENT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO TW SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-CHINA-TAIWAN RELATIONS ¶1. Summary: Taiwan's major Chinese-language dailies focused February 3 news coverage on an article written by James Kraska on a scenario in which the United States lost a naval war to China in 2015; on U.S. arms sales to Taiwan; and on the Taipei City government's plan to increase the property tax on luxury apartments starting next year. ¶2. In terms of editorials and commentaries, an op-ed in the pro-independence "Liberty Times" discussed U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and Sino-U.S. relations. The article said whichever side backs off from the confrontation will be the paper tiger. An editorial in the KMT-leaning "China Times," on the other hand, said that only when Taiwan-U.S. relations are stable can cross-Strait relations be stabilized. A separate "China Times" column discussed the U.S. military's recent test of its missile interception capability. The article concluded by saying the United States wants to be the number one in the world, and it has to contain China after all. An editorial in the pro-independence, English-language "Taiwan News" discussed U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and said President Ma Ying-jeou's tacit acceptance of Beijing's "one China" principle may have discouraged Washington from providing more sophisticated weaponry to Taiwan. End summary. A) "Which Is a Paper Tiger, Beijing or Washington?" Columnist Paul Lin wrote in the pro-independence "Liberty Times" [circulation: 680,000] (2/3): "New changes have emerged recently in Sino-U.S. relations. Following his submissive visit to Beijing last November, U.S. President Barack Obama was humiliated by [Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao] at the Copenhagen summit. Washington was thus forced to 'toughen up,' using Google's case as a turning point. Since Ma Ying-jeou's transits through the United States and Washington's announcement of arms sales to Taiwan both involve the 'core interests' recently asserted by China, tension has thus risen between China and the United States. "Washington offered a new level of treatment to Ma primarily and evidently because it was worried that Ma's incompetence and isolation will hasten his pace to surrender [Taiwan] to China. That's why it wanted to support him. If China did not protest against it, such a reception model would also be applicable to the future presidents of Taiwan. If China protests, then the Taiwan people will understand that no matter how Ma has tried to curry favor with China, they should not expect Beijing to respect Taiwan. As for the U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, [Washington] was just fulfilling a request proposed by the previous DPP administration, which was turned down by the KMT then. Besides, the [arms sales package] was a result of various cuts, and it had been notified to or negotiated with China in advance -- also a [failure to implement fully] the 'Taiwan Relations Act.' ... "When Beijing and Washington confront each other, whichever side backs off is the paper tiger. The United States normally does not 'pursue and attack enemy forces with the advantage of a recent victory;' China, on the other hand, given its traits of hooliganism, will certainly push its luck. One can tell from Sino-U.S. relations over the past few decades that Washington has been making all kinds of concessions, while Beijing has lately upgraded Taiwan to become its 'core interest,' which will likely expand to include other [matters] under the United States' sphere of influence. Why doesn't the United States also call upon the ideals upon which its nation was built, such as freedom, democracy, human rights, and rule of law, its core interests? The United States was even willing to protect the KMT dictatorship; now that Taiwan is a democratic country, how will the United States look upon itself if the island were sold out to China?..." B) "Only When Taiwan-U.S. Relations Are Stable Can Cross-Strait Relations Be Stabilized" The KMT-leaning "China Times" [circulation: 120,000] editorialized (2/3): "Even though the U.S. government's announcement of a US$6.4 billion worth arms sales package to Taiwan proved that Taiwan-U.S. relations remain consistently stable, a certain warning signal has surfaced. Such a costly arms sales package has unexpectedly excluded weapons of active defensive capabilities such as the conventional submarines and F-16 C/D fighter jets, so it was far inferior to our expectations. Frankly speaking, U.S. arms sales to Taiwan have shown a trend of 'weakening,' and the Ma administration must thus address it prudently, because without a stable Taiwan-U.S. relationship, there will not be stable cross-Strait relations. ... "Arms sales are a key indicator to stable Taiwan-U.S. relations. The arms sales package this time accounts for 69 percent of Taiwan's national defense budget for this fiscal year; the figure may sound shockingly high, but the weapons are all long-pending ones, and there is nothing new in the package. Normally, Washington is able to approve such an arms sales package quickly, but this time it was put off for more than six months -- an unprecedented sign in the history of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. Thus it appears to reveal a certain warning signal. People started to feel concerned whether this will be the last and biggest [U.S.] arms sale [to Taiwan]. One indeed cannot rule out such concerns. It is not long since U.S. President Barack Obama took over the helm. Even though his strategists in Asian-Pacific affairs are familiar with cross-Strait issues and have a certain understanding of Taiwan's situation, his core staff may not necessarily share the same understanding, in particular, the perception of China. It appears that the strategists close to Obama have other plans, which will possibly create new variables for the future of Taiwan-U.S. relations. "According to the provisions in the 'Taiwan Relations Act (TRA),' the U.S. Congress does not 'enjoin' the executive branch to sell weapons to Taiwan. Strictly speaking, it is not binding for Washington to agree to sell defensive weapons to Taiwan. The real strength behind the United States' willingness to provide defensive weapons to Taiwan does not lie in the law itself but in its sold political commitment to Taiwan's freedom. Even though there are clauses in the TRA related to [Taiwan's] security, Washington's political commitment remains essential to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. The subtlety of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan lies in such indescribable 'political commitment,' and its efficacy depends not only on whether Taiwan and the United States share the same strategic interests but also on the rise of China. The previous U.S. administrations have all tried their utmost to keep the balance [between the two directions], but if the Obama administration regards the latter more important than the former, the Ma administration will have to watch out. This has nothing to do with whether the United States will sell out Taiwan; it is simply a consequence caused by the development of the international situation. ... "We can totally understand why Beijing is opposed to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. On the political level, arms sales involve the relations between the United States, China and Taiwan. Though its nature differs from the status of cross-Strait relations, it certainly falls under the category of 'shelving the controversies.' Since it is certain that the arms sales issue will not be resolved in the short term, why not put it aside. Beijing's doing the utmost it can to seek to smother U.S. arms sales to Taiwan not only will not contribute to reconciliation across the Taiwan Strait but will also amplify Taiwan's sense of crisis. ... U.S. arms sales to Taiwan are the touchstone of the stability of Taiwan-U.S. relations. With cross-Strait relations improving, the arms sales can be adjusted according to Taiwan's defense needs and military transformation, but by no means can they be terminated because of [China's] threats. ..." C) "Obama Is a Realist plus Opportunist" The "International Lookout" column in the KMT-leaning "China Times" [circulation: 120,000] wrote (2/3): "The U.S. military tested the 'ground-based mid-course missile interception' [defense system] over the Pacific Ocean on January 31, but [the test] failed. It is said they are still trying to figure out the reasons for the failure. Just twenty days ago, China successfully tested its mid-course interception capability. ... The United States has started earlier than China in building its anti-ballistic missile system, whose scale is also bigger than that of China's. Washington also put the core of its anti-missile deployment in the Asia-Pacific. ... Judging from its entire set-up, it is quite obvious that the target of [the United States' anti-missile network' is China. "It goes without saying that [building] such an anti-missile network against China is not an easy task. ... But from such a move one can tell the relationship between the United States and China. Washington still wants to contain the rise of China after all. Just as when President Obama said in his State of the Union address, the United States is absolutely the number one. ... On China's part, Beijing probably has no ambition to become the number one. But Washington still feels ill at ease. It may be right when someone says that Obama upholds the 'offensive realism.'" D) "Ma's Policies Deepen Taiwan's Predicament" The pro-independence, English-language "Taiwan News" [circulation: 20,000] editorialized (2/3): "... However, the procurement package does not include systems Taiwan urgently needs to balance the PRC's rapidly expanding and upgrading military prowess, notably advanced F-16 C/D Block jet fighters, AEGIS frigates or conventional submarines. Ironically, Washington's selection of defensive weapon systems may have been influenced by Ma's change of Taiwan's strategic concepts from preparing for 'decisive battle outside of the territory' forward defense based on local air and naval superiority to 'determined defense and effective deterrence,' which envisions an army-based defense on Taiwan's soil. Combined with Ma's tacit acceptance of Beijing's 'one China principle,' the latter concept indicates to international society that the KMT government believes Taiwan's eventual annexation by a 'rising China' is inevitable and may have discouraged Washington from providing more sophisticated weaponry. Moreover, Beijing's overreaction to Obama's decision, including the rupture of Sino-American military exchanges and threats to impose sanctions on U.S. companies, may very well be calculated to draw a red line to block Washington from selling F-16 C/D jets, AEGIS frigates or conventional submarines to Taiwan in the future. ... "The pursuit of normalized relations with China cannot be twisted into a justification to surrender Taiwan's hard-won democracy and prosperity. Instead, Ma should remind the world community that Taiwan is part of the global democratic alliance against any authoritarian state, is resolved to seek peace with, and not at the expense of, democracy and dignity, and intensify efforts to persuade Washington and other capitals that Taiwan is committed to defending our democratic way of life and needs advanced self-defense capability to dissuade the PRC from any adventurism." STANTON